Why sign road names at overpasses with no on-ramps and off-ramps?

[Amaury]

For example, here near Ellensburg on I-82: https://maps.app.goo.gl/2nGpRGWHccYJcFkn7

Other times the signs are on the overpass instead of on the ground, but either way, I can certainly understand other numbered routes, and, of course, at exits (such as here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXJ1hFmWtLMTTgyCA), but minor road names when there's no way to access them at that location? Why sign them there, such as in the above example?

And it's certainly not consistent, either, at least not here in Washington, such as Number 6 Road, which goes over I-90 here, not being signed: https://maps.app.goo.gl/BfbReZuZ41NYENtD8

[1995hoo]

One reason might be to help a motorist, or a responder, identify the location when making an emergency call. For example, "I'm on I-82 under the Tjossem Road overpass."

[Amaury]

I mean, that's certainly a plausible and a logical reason, but I feel like you could just as easily reference the nearest milepost, such as milepost 1 here on I-82, which is right there near the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LKE3Kpmz7WRjcRJGA (looking westbound)

[kphoger]

So people know where they are when driving.

But that brings up the question:  why not sign the cross-road on underpasses for the same reason?
[cue people posting examples of that]

[GaryV]

why not sign the cross-road on underpasses

Like this?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/dDwVE2tq9mLpPebK6

[Amaury]

So people know where they are when driving.

But that brings up the question:  why not sign the cross-road on underpasses for the same reason?
[cue people posting examples of that]

Yup, and that also makes sense, which is why I also asked why it's not consistent, at least not here in Washington? (See the Number 6 Road example. Another example is the overpass here, which is US 97, but there's no signage on the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/b3GYaSZrbLjBnHnq9 Whereas WA 202, which goes under I-90 here, is signed: https://maps.app.goo.gl/z6yRgurxPr2HZmas7) But I guess that's perhaps also because Exit 106 is right there for US 97, but so is Exit 31 for WA 202, and it's signed.

In other areas, where there's already an exit, I don't see a sign as necessary for the overpass or underpass, as the road name is already on the exit sign, though there are many areas that still have it, such as above with WA 202.

[Max Rockatansky]

How else do suggest the world be informed that Sore Finger Road exists? 

https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/05/sore-finger-road.html?m=1

[Mapmikey]

So people know where they are when driving.

But that brings up the question:  why not sign the cross-road on underpasses for the same reason?
[cue people posting examples of that]

This is standard practice in Virginia and Maryland, possibly North Carolina too. South Carolina does not do this.

[pderocco]

One reason might be to help a motorist, or a responder, identify the location when making an emergency call. For example, "I'm on I-82 under the Tjossem Road overpass."

If I was on the phone, I wouldn't know how to pronounce that one.

[Scott5114]

For the same reason river crossings have a sign saying what river it is.

[roadfro]

I mean, that's certainly a plausible and a logical reason, but I feel like you could just as easily reference the nearest milepost, such as milepost 1 here on I-82, which is right there near the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LKE3Kpmz7WRjcRJGA (looking westbound)

I think it's more about helping people know where they are in relation to recognizable locations. Mileposts aren't really something the average motorist is going to notice—and if the agency only erects milepost every mile (if at all), this can help drivers and first responders narrow locations down. But you're right about consistency, especially for not posting cross street signs at underpasses.

In Nevada, overpass street name signage (interchange or cross streets) isn't done with green-on-white signs (although the first instances were done this way). It has been NDOT's standard practice in bridge design since early 2000's to incorporate the street name as a decorative as part of the bridge's design & aesthetics, in new builds and (beginning later) refreshes during major construction projects. Examples:

• Las Vegas: US 95 & Torrey Pines Dr, one of the first examples (if not the first) of NDOT incorporating a street name into the bridge design
• Las Vegas: I-15 & Warm Springs Rd
• Las Vegas: CC-215 & Lake Mead (interchange)
• North Las Vegas: I-15 & Craig Rd (interchange)
• Henderson: I-11 & Horizon Dr (interchange) (this one is a retrofit)
• Carson City: I-580 & Koontz Ln
• Reno: I-80 & Washington St (this one is a retrofit)
• Reno: US 395 & Parr Blvd (interchange)
• Boulder City: US 95/SR 173 & I-11 (interchange) in this case, the freeway name is shown on the bridge of the "side street"

[wanderer2575]

In Nevada, overpass street name signage (interchange or cross streets) isn't done with green-on-white signs (although the first instances were done this way). It has been NDOT's standard practice in bridge design since early 2000's to incorporate the street name as a decorative as part of the bridge's design & aesthetics, in new builds and (beginning later) refreshes during major construction projects.

MDOT (Michigan) did that with the reconstruction/widening of I-75 in Oakland County, but doubled down with white-on-green signs in addition to incorporating the road name into the bridge build.  For example.

[wriddle082]

So people know where they are when driving.

But that brings up the question:  why not sign the cross-road on underpasses for the same reason?
[cue people posting examples of that]

This is standard practice in Virginia and Maryland, possibly North Carolina too. South Carolina does not do this.

South Carolina posts the S-(county #)-(route #) secondary route number or primary route number on overpasses, as well as the height clearance.  Nothing for underpasses, however.

Indiana is also pretty good about signing road names or designations at both overpasses and underpasses.  Tennessee started posting road names on overpasses on blue signs in urban areas several years back, but I don't think it's quite made it into the rural areas.  But their 2/10 blue mileage reference markers are posted statewide (mostly in the median).

[Henry]

IL (at least in Chicago) not only signs road/street names on overpasses, but also block numbers and even the direction, such as this one on I-290 on the West Side.

[1995hoo]

One reason might be to help a motorist, or a responder, identify the location when making an emergency call. For example, "I'm on I-82 under the Tjossem Road overpass."

If I was on the phone, I wouldn't know how to pronounce that one.

Me either, so I'd sound it out, then spell it using the NATO alphabet.

[Scott5114]

One reason might be to help a motorist, or a responder, identify the location when making an emergency call. For example, "I'm on I-82 under the Tjossem Road overpass."

If I was on the phone, I wouldn't know how to pronounce that one.

Me either, so I'd sound it out, then spell it using the NATO alphabet.

It looks vaguely Norwegian to me so I'd probably pronounce it "tee-awesome".

[hbelkins]

Kentucky's policy is to post state route numbers on small green text signs at overpasses that cross interstates and parkways, and in places where the interstate/parkway crosses a state route. Implementation is a bit spotty, though, and some districts either post county route numbers (District 9 along I-64) or county road names (a few places in District 6 along I-75).

[TheHighwayMan3561]

MN usually signs underpasseed roads, but much more rarely signs overpassed roads.

[Quillz]

I mean, that's certainly a plausible and a logical reason, but I feel like you could just as easily reference the nearest milepost, such as milepost 1 here on I-82, which is right there near the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LKE3Kpmz7WRjcRJGA (looking westbound)

I think it's more about helping people know where they are in relation to recognizable locations. Mileposts aren't really something the average motorist is going to notice—and if the agency only erects milepost every mile (if at all), this can help drivers and first responders narrow locations down. But you're right about consistency, especially for not posting cross street signs at underpasses.

It's also important to consider mileposts are more likely to change than street names. This is one of the reasons some states will generally use names over numbers (like Alaska, or well known routes like PCH or Topanga in California). If/when some changes are made that require a postmile change, you can still refer to a consistent name. How often something like this happens, probably not much, but it could.

[Jim]

I'm not sure of how useful overpass road names are but I do like them if only to learn a bit about the area I'm passing through.

The topic reminds me of my annoyance (discussed elsewhere on this forum in the past) that the New York Thruway does not post town/city/county line signs.  I like to know where I am, even if I can't get to anything there until I get to the next exit.  I don't know why they think the name of the road on an overpass is useful enough to post consistently but entering a town/city/county is not.

[webny99]

I mean, that's certainly a plausible and a logical reason, but I feel like you could just as easily reference the nearest milepost, such as milepost 1 here on I-82, which is right there near the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LKE3Kpmz7WRjcRJGA (looking westbound)

Just as easily? Perhaps, if there's one right nearby, but not just as memorably. Road names are useful for knowing where you are in non-emergencies, too, and they're usually easier to remember in the context of a specific location. 

In other areas, where there's already an exit, I don't see a sign as necessary for the overpass or underpass, as the road name is already on the exit sign, though there are many areas that still have it, such as above with WA 202.

Exits to overpasses are far from a consistent 1:1 ratio, especially in areas with Texas-style frontage roads, roads that cross the freeway within an interchange complex, or interchanges with multiple overpasses à la I-390 Exit 11.

[roadfro]

I mean, that's certainly a plausible and a logical reason, but I feel like you could just as easily reference the nearest milepost, such as milepost 1 here on I-82, which is right there near the overpass: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LKE3Kpmz7WRjcRJGA (looking westbound)

Just as easily? Perhaps, if there's one right nearby, but not just as memorably. Road names are useful for knowing where you are in non-emergencies, too, and they're usually easier to remember in the context of a specific location.  

Or you could have both. In Nevada a white county milepost paddle is typically posted along a freeway/divided highway at every overpass—example (although this one is a little off from the crossing) 

Admittedly, Nevada has not been consistent about milepost signing on urban freeways... but decorative street name signing on the overpass is most prevalent in the cities, so you usually still have something to locate by.

[andrepoiy]

Probably for navigation purposes. The local news radio in Toronto always references certain roads that do not have exits such as Spanbridge on the DVP, or Strachan Ave on the Gardiner for traffic reports (e.g. Traffic is crawling approaching Strachan)

I believe it is Ontario's policy to only include such a sign if there's no exit, but it seems like many new freeways built (407 East, 427 Extension) are violating that and putting those signs up even when there is an exit.